Case law

MARTINEZ v. MCCORMICK

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 5, 2024

As such, courts are afforded authority to dismiss those claims whose factual contentions are clearly baseless. Id.; Denton v. … (plaintiff’s claim that he had uncovered evidence of a conspiracy by the former mayor to commit sabotage and espionage in order to establish ecclesiastical law and in some way interfere with U.S. commerce were

TROTMAN v. SMITH

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 16, 2021

immunity. … retaliatory action, or (2) a pattern of antagonism coupled with timing to establish a causal link.”

Petition of Garcia

65 F. Supp. 143 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 28, 1946

The facts clearly show that when the petitioner arrived in this country, his name was certified as Leal Emilo. … It is, therefore, the opinion of the Court that clear and convincing evidence definitely establishes the error which exists to be a clerical mistake.

Shaffer v. Board of School Directors of the Albert Gallatin Area School District

570 F. Supp. 698 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 16, 1983

Clearly, this is a case where the federal district court may permissibly exercise judicial power over a pendant state claim. … The one and one-half mile limit is also qualified by the condition that proper shelter be provided “where needed” and walking conditions constituting a hazard to safety of the pupil do not exist, the existence of such hazard

Yount v. Weinberger

375 F. Supp. 941 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · May 17, 1974

The claimant qualifies as the “parent” of the wage earner under the law. The parties agree that the claimant has established the first three of these elements. It is the fourth element which is in dispute. … The administrative record contains evidence which clearly establishes the depth ■ and mutual warmth of the relationship. The record on this point has been fairly summarized in the defendant’s brief.

KARPINSKI v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND BHCS

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 13, 2023

In his Objections (ECF No. 39), Plaintiff contests whether or not the PA DOC and its BHCS should qualify for immunity. … However, it is well established that Plaintiff's instant federal civil rights claims against this state agency are barred both by the Eleventh Amendment, Lavia v. Pennsylvania Dept.

Moss v. Koolvent Aluminum Products, Inc.

962 F. Supp. 657 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 15, 1997

To establish a prima facie case of employment discrimination, the plaintiff must establish the following elements by a preponderance of the evidence: (1) that he was a member of a protected class, (2) that he was qualified … The evidence clearly shows that Moss’ performance did not make him a good choice for either of these promotions.

N.S. v. WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL FOR BLIND CHILDREN

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 23, 2024

Mar. 17, 2011); and see 42 U.S.C. § 12132, providing that pursuant to Title II: “no qualified individual with a disability shall by reason of such disability be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of … . § 8541 (“[a]s a chartered school, WPSBC is entitled to immunity pursuant to Pennsylvania’s government immunity statute.”). ECF No. 24 at 6.

Penelope Bell v. City of Clairton, Duane Ringgold, and Eric Fusco

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 5, 2026

Judgment on the pleadings will be granted only if “the movant clearly establishes there are no material issues of fact, and he or she is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Sikirica v. Nationwide Ins. … In sum, Plaintiff has failed to plead facts necessary to establish a prima facie claim of discrimination on the basis of her sex or age.

TATE v. HUD WASHINGTON DC AND HOUSING URBAN DEVELOPMENT

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 30, 2020

Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 577 (1972) (“To have a property interest in a benefit, a person clearly must have more than an abstract need or desire” and “more than a unilateral expectation of it. … Dreswicki in her official capacity as an alleged HUD “associate,” are barred under the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

BEY v. HEDIGER

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 12, 2025

absolute immunity clearly appears on the face of the complaint.” … A review of the Complaint confirms that ADA Pellegrini’s alleged conduct is subject to absolute prosecutorial immunity, as Mr. Bey’s claims, with one exception, are clearly aimed at prosecutorial functions.

MARTIN v. WETZEL

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 14, 2019

Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570 (rejecting the traditional 12 (b)(6) standard established in Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 (1957)). … Section 8521 of Title 42 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes clearly states, “Nothing contained in this subchapter shall be construed to waive the immunity of the Commonwealth from suit in Federal courts guaranteed

City of Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

512 F. Supp. 1117 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 27, 1981

Clearly not, for Plaintiffs are in fact participating in the Duquesne Light rate proceeding, and have previously participated in proceedings before the Commission. … There was no issue of jurisdiction or Sovereign Immunity in that case..

Bellas v. Cbs, Inc.

201 F.R.D. 411 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 20, 2000

It is well-established in this Circuit that joinder is impracticable and thus the numerosity requirement is satisfied if the proposed class numbers 100 or more. Welch v. … Rule 23(b)(3) is “framed for situations in which class-action treatment is not as clearly called for as it is in Rule 23(b)(1) and (b)(2) situations, but where class suit may nevertheless be convenient and desirable.”

WATTS v. United States

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 29, 2024

The United States contends that Plaintiff bears the burden of rebutting its attack and establishing that subject matter jurisdiction exists. … “Because the Federal Tort Claims Act constitutes a waiver of sovereign immunity, the Act’s established procedures have been strictly construed.” Livera v.

Patel v. Shinseki

984 F. Supp. 2d 461 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 27, 2013

Klein were qualified to use the PET scan machine. Id. at ¶ 33 . … GPU Inc., 2 F.Supp.2d 730, 741 (W.D.Pa.1998) (“The employer is entitled to establish the job requirements and the plaintiff must offer more than his own opinion that he is qualified.”)

MICKENS v. CLARK

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 24, 2019

Section 8521 of Title 42 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes clearly states, “Nothing contained in this subchapter shall be construed to waive the immunity of the Commonwealth from suit in Federal courts guaranteed … Similarly, the same conclusion applies to all claims directed against Defendants in their official capacities, as such claims are clearly barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

Colegrove v. Cameron MacHine Co.

172 F. Supp. 2d 611 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 2001

immune from liability.” … This identification tag clearly indicated that A-B manufactured the foot switch pictured in Exhibit 63.

SHALLENBERGER v. ALLEGHENY COUNTY

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 8, 2021

Similar to the absolute immunity from Section 1983 liability that is granted to prosecutors for their actions in prosecuting criminal cases, child welfare workers “are entitled to absolute immunity for their … Metzger are covered by absolute immunity. Defendants also argue that the Amended Complaint does not establish personal involvement by Ms. Smith in the alleged violation of Ms.

United States ex rel. Bartlett v. Tyrone Hospital, Inc.

234 F.R.D. 113 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 27, 2006

Clearly, damages are not necessary to make a claim of conspiracy under the FCA, and therefore to recover the civil penalty and costs. … Therefore, the Court finds that the intracorporate immunity doctrine applies to Quorum thereby preventing any allegation of conspiracy under Count IV between Tyrone and Quorum.